Maintaining natural, ragged edged bunkers.

« **on:** August 31, 2006, 04:03:45 PM »

What is the maintenance practice dealing with these natural sand flashed bunkers?

In the Augusta bunker thread a few people said that they are hard and (expensive?) to maintain. Although I have pretty extensive experience with steep grass faced bunkers I have absolutely none with the natural kinds.

What sort of mowing, fertilizing, drainage issues are associated with these bunkers?

And as Reese Jones seems to think are they all eventually doomed to collapse?

« **Reply #1 on:** August 31, 2006, 04:11:35 PM »

Ryan:

It is not easy to maintain the shaggy bunkers of Pacific Dunes or Sand Hills. They're certainly easier to mow around than bunkers with steep grassy banks, but there is a tremendous amount of wind erosion and the management must roll with the punches as far as edging them and replacing sand and dealing with the occasional collapsed face [due to the wind erosion creating an overhanging lip that collapses].

Are they all doomed to collapse? No, of course not.

Which style is easier to maintain? Mostly, the maintenance cost of bunkers depends on two things: the level of grooming specified by the club or owner, and the degree of steep banks which are involved. You can take a lower-maintenance approach to either style, and have it be okay; if you take a higher-maintenance approach, both can be expensive. And the more steep and deep hazards there are, the more costly they are to maintain, whether they look like Sand Hills or Fishers Island.

« **Reply #2 on:** August 31, 2006, 04:15:28 PM »

Ryan,
Bunkers like this take A LOT of maintenance. And trust me, you are not maintaining them sitting on your butt with a sand pro! Those guys you see are hand raking the sand back up the faces after a night of steady rain.

This photo is of course from Winged Foot West.

Mark

« **Reply #3 on:** August 31, 2006, 04:27:50 PM »

Mark, Ive been there, with the rake fixing all the washed out bunkers and its not fun. And just think after the first washout is fixed there are only 209 left!

In the case of steep faces the amount of hand watering and fertilizing has to be pretty costly. Is there any special fertilizing that needs to be done to keep the fescues and native grasses around the bunker edges in check.

« **Reply #4 on:** August 31, 2006, 04:29:35 PM »

So would it really be that big of deal if the face of one of those natural bunkers collapsed? In some respects I could see how that would add to the charm of the course and the natural hazards - you know bunkers that have just always been there and were created by nature.

« **Reply #5 on:** August 31, 2006, 04:32:43 PM »

This kind of shocked me when I was at Talking Stick the other day. An enterance for the sand pro. Who is to blame for this? Architect, Super, American golfers?

« **Reply #6 on:** August 31, 2006, 05:22:01 PM »

Ryan,
Look at the size of the bunker you pictured and the nice, unstructured, hand-finished edge it has. Why is there any blame attached to using a sand pro on such a big expanse of sand?

« **Reply #7 on:** August 31, 2006, 06:18:28 PM »

Jim,
The sand pro has ruined the natural edge that this bunker once had. The continue entering and exiting of a sand pro will pull sand up and over the orgianly grass edge. When I worked with Jeff Bradley at Friar's Head (Ironiclly, this is a Jeff Bradley bunker) Jeff was very adimit about the bunkers being hand raked only as to not destroy the edges.
Upon a recent UGSA visit here at Long Cove, the agronomist commented that hand ranking allows for the orginal bunker outlines to be preserved.

Tony Nysse
Sr. Asst. Supt.
Long Cove Club
HHI, SC

« **Reply #8 on:** August 31, 2006, 06:26:16 PM »

Quote from: Ryan Farrow on August 31, 2006, 04:32:43 PM

This kind of shocked me when I was at Talking Stick the other day. An enterance for the sand pro. Who is to blame for this? Architect, Super, American golfers?

That look has a certain utilitarian appeal to me, even with the entrance.

Think of it as a entrance for golfers that just happens to fit a SandPro.

What's the difference between that and a staircase?

« **Reply #9 on:** August 31, 2006, 06:29:02 PM »

Well Put Anthony. This is a very common occurrence at Talking Stick and I imagine Bill Coore and Ben Crenshaw recommended hand raking. The bunkers on the course are a thing of beauty but when the sand pros come in and trash the edges they start to loose their appeal.

This is a good example of how these types of bunkers may in some instances cost more to maintain. Or if the club decided to use a Sand Pro they save some money and loose some of the beauty that was once a part of the course.

« **Reply #10 on:** August 31, 2006, 06:31:34 PM »

Please, lets not kid ourselves.

There is nothing NATURAL about that edge at all: with or without the SandPro entrance. In fact, the only time I've really seen a NATURAL edge has involved a cliff or rock formation.

Random plots of sand don't litter well-manicured plots of turf grass naturally, either.

Does the look have an appeal? Yes, it mimicks natural features found on the original golf courses, however, it's not natural. Very little about a golf course is.

« **Reply #11 on:** August 31, 2006, 06:32:34 PM »

Kyle, you have a sick mind. Do you like the look of stairs in a bunker? You certainly can not say it looks natural. Plus look at the right of the destruction. I see about a 6 inch lip. I’m sure even grandma can make it out of that one.

« **Reply #12 on:** August 31, 2006, 06:34:11 PM »

Quote from: Ryan Farrow on August 31, 2006, 06:32:34 PM

Kyle, you have a sick mind. Do you like the look of stairs in a bunker? You certainly can not say it looks natural. Plus look at the right of the destruction. I see about a 6 inch lip. I’m sure even grandma can make it out of that one.

Ryan,

Stairs in a bunker used in the right place are VERY appealing to me, I especially like them built into the face of the bunker.

Nothing about that bunker looks natural, with or without the SandPro entrance.

« **Reply #13 on:** August 31, 2006, 06:49:49 PM »

Quote from: Sean Arble on August 31, 2006, 06:34:06 PM

Kyle

There are two reasons for the difference. First is that stairs are put in for safety purposes. The second is aesthetics (including the erosion prevention). Staircases are generally hidden until you reach the bunker. This abberation looks like it can be seen as out of place from a distance. If the bunker cannot be maintaned properly and retain its intended look than it should be altered. Besides, stairs look much cooler than this cheesy in/out ramp.

Ciao

Sean

At what point is the bunker not "out-of-place" looking and by what standard of nature?

I don't see the feature as any more abohorrent than a more geometrically "perfect" bunker.

By definition, the bunker in and of itself is "out-of-place."

« **Reply #14 on:** September 03, 2006, 08:37:27 PM »

Ideally you don't maintain ragged edges. You let them morf to the weather and wear. But, as pointed out here, they can be difficult to maintain to a particular "look" — that is common in golf courses. Which helps answer the question of whether golf courses are supposed to change look...

Yes. Otherwise you will be always swimming uphill, fighting change and natural growth and erosion. Which is why most great courses fit the land. When a golf hole sits into the natural land there is inherently less change that will take place. Therefore, I suspect, less conflict in the minds of those who have come to love the look and character.

« **Reply #15 on:** September 03, 2006, 09:29:29 PM »

I think the cost of maintaining steep, sand-faced bunkers can't be justified by 99% of courses. Hand raking is just too expensive. Sure, they look great, but it is an expensive look. From a playing standpoint, the ball usually ends up in the bottom of the bunker whether there is grass or sand on the face.

A Banks courses near me, Rock Spring, has sand-faced bunkers and they added beautiful fescue a few years ago, but the bunkers are constantly collapsing. They must be hand-raked. Now they are doing away with the look one by one.

I play at Hackensack, and Rees Jones re-did all of our bunkers with grass faces, and they are just so much more practical. We can groom them efficiently with machines (without sand pro entrances!) and we still have the same sand shots that we did when the faces were all sand. I'm sure the purests will groan, but there are only so many man-hours in a week...Our crews can focus on greens, tees, fairways and roughs. There has to be a balance between look, playability and cost.

« **Reply #16 on:** September 03, 2006, 09:31:31 PM »

Kyle, Have you ever been to the Sand Hills region?

Your above statements would suggest that you have not.
May I reccomend you get here to see the natural blowouts and then tell me they dont look like bunkers.

« **Reply #17 on:** September 04, 2006, 07:25:35 PM »

Quote from: Ryan Farrow on August 31, 2006, 04:03:45 PM

What is the maintenance practice dealing with these natural sand flashed bunkers?

Few bunkers are natural and even fewer are "natural sand flashed" bunkers.

Links bunkers and bunkers found on sites like Sand Hills have natural sand flashes, created, maintained and destroyed by Mother Nature, unless man lends some assistance.[/color]

In the Augusta bunker thread a few people said that they are hard and (expensive?) to maintain. Although I have pretty extensive experience with steep grass faced bunkers I have absolutely none with the natural kinds.

There are no natural kinds of bunkers at ANGC

Wind, rain, man and green budgets can determine their viability.[/color]

What sort of mowing, fertilizing, drainage issues are associated with these bunkers?

Why would mowing be a consideration ?

Why would fertilizing be a consideration ?

Drainage principles aren't that much different from grass faced bunkers. A great deal depends upon the sub-surface, and not the bunker above the surface.[/color]

And as Reese Jones seems to think are they all eventually doomed to collapse?

Where did Rees Jones make that statement ?[/color]

« **Reply #18 on:** September 04, 2006, 07:39:30 PM »

Quote from: Patrick_Mucci on September 04, 2006, 07:25:35 PM

Quote from: Ryan Farrow on August 31, 2006, 04:03:45 PM

What is the maintenance practice dealing with these natural sand flashed bunkers?

Few bunkers are natural and even fewer are "natural sand flashed" bunkers.

Links bunkers and bunkers found on sites like Sand Hills have natural sand flashes, created, maintained and destroyed by Mother Nature, unless man lends some assistance.[/color]

In the Augusta bunker thread a few people said that they are hard and (expensive?) to maintain. Although I have pretty extensive experience with steep grass faced bunkers I have absolutely none with the natural kinds.

*Not Augusta's bunkers but rugged bunkers in general*

There are no natural kinds of bunkers at ANGC

Wind, rain, man and green budgets can determine their viability.[/color]

What sort of mowing, fertilizing, drainage issues are associated with these bunkers?

Why would mowing be a consideration ?

*Is it just a loop around the bunker? Do any of the fescues growing around the bunker need trimmed on occasion?*

Why would fertilizing be a consideration ?

*It is on grass faced bunker*

Drainage principles aren't that much different from grass faced bunkers. A great deal depends upon the sub-surface, and not the bunker above the surface.[/color]

*in regards to grass faced bunkers it has more to do with how deep the bunkers are and how much water is running down the faces, sub surface drainage doesnt have much to do with washouts*

And as Reese Jones seems to think are they all eventually doomed to collapse?

Where did Rees Jones make that statement?[/color]

*Forrest and Fine's Bunkers, Pits, and Hazards book*

« **Reply #19 on:** September 04, 2006, 10:47:03 PM »

Quote from: Adam Clayman on September 03, 2006, 09:31:31 PM

Kyle, Have you ever been to the Sand Hills region?

Your above statements would suggest that you have not.
May I reccomend you get here to see the natural blowouts and then tell me they dont look like bunkers.

Adam,

I certainly acknowledge that there are instances where bunkers naturally "occur" in such configurations.

However, the desert and Eastern Pennsylvania, for example, are not among those places.

« **Reply #20 on:** September 04, 2006, 11:09:29 PM »

Ryan,
I have literally hundreds of photos of natural bunker from the sand hills of Nebraska. They come in all kinds of shapes and forms. Most are created by the cattle or the wind. The following photo is in the eastern portion of the Sandhills:

Notice how the bluestem grasses have formed around the bunker. This often happens when you have disturbance, i.e. a road. I would suspect that the Dismal River Club will see quite a little of this over time as they have far more construction roads than, say, Ballyneal.

« **Reply #21 on:** September 04, 2006, 11:13:23 PM »

Ron, I assume that the blue stem grasses are of the darker hue? I don't understand how the addition of roads influences the grasses.

Nice picture by the way.

« **Reply #22 on:** September 04, 2006, 11:22:38 PM »

Quote from: Kyle Harris on August 31, 2006, 06:31:34 PM

Please, lets not kid ourselves.

There is nothing NATURAL about that edge at all: with or without the SandPro entrance. In fact, the only time I've really seen a NATURAL edge has involved a cliff or rock formation.

Random plots of sand don't litter well-manicured plots of turf grass naturally, either.

Does the look have an appeal? Yes, it mimicks natural features found on the original golf courses, however, it's not natural. Very little about a golf course is.

Amen Kyle, wisely said.

Treehouse, let's not forget that these are HAZARDS. There should be no complaints about bunkers AT ALL, NONE. Take them as they are presented to you. You should not be in them in the first place.

Troy

« **Reply #23 on:** September 05, 2006, 08:34:49 AM »

The bunkers at Kingsley are by far the easiest to maintain of any course I've been at. There is no edging required if they are raked correctly. No fertilizing and very little trimming. We have wind, but nothing like Bandon or Sand Hills so we don't fight the wind erosion they deal with.

The difficulty is in not watering the faces. The only faces we have to trim are the ones that catch too much greens irrigation. It causes them to get too thick. Check out the photo's at kingsleyclub.com.

The other problem is when balls hang up on the faces golfers go after them, damage the faces, then balls fall into those pockets and create really tough shots.

We have had many 2-3" rain events. Four bunkers is the most we have had sand washes in after thes big rain events and two were caused bu plugged cart path drains causing water to overflow into the bunkers.

DeVries did a tremendous job draining water around the bunkers during construction.

We track rake our bunkers by hand every day. Ocassionally we sand pro some of the larger FW bunkers before tournaments.

« **Reply #24 on:** September 05, 2006, 10:17:38 AM »

That’s the answer I was hoping for. Of course is all depends on how crazy you want to get with them. But if everything is done right and you have the right conditions they can be every easy to maintain?

I'm guessing you guys don’t have a fly mower in your shop?

The bunkers look great on the website.

News:

Ryan Farrow

Tom_Doak

Mark_Fine

Ryan Farrow

Steve Kline

Ryan Farrow

Jim_Kennedy

Anthony_Nysse

Kyle Harris

Ryan Farrow

Kyle Harris

Ryan Farrow

Kyle Harris

Kyle Harris

Forrest Richardson

Bill Brightly

Adam Clayman

Patrick_Mucci

Ryan Farrow

Kyle Harris

Ron Farris

Ryan Farrow

Troy Alderson

Dan_Lucas

Ryan Farrow